================
@@ -14,13 +14,18 @@ void __builtin_va_copy(double d);
// expected-error@+2 {{cannot redeclare builtin function '__builtin_va_end'}}
// expected-note@+1 {{'__builtin_va_end' is a builtin with type}}
void __builtin_va_end(__builtin_va_list);
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -fsyntax-only -verify
-// RUN: %clang_cc1 %s -fsyntax-only -verify -x c
void __va_start(__builtin_va_list*, ...);
+ void *__builtin_assume_aligned(const void *, size_t, ...);
#ifdef __cplusplus
-void *__builtin_assume_aligned(const void *, size_t, ...) noexcept;
-#else
-void *__builtin_assume_aligned(const void *, size_t, ...);
+constexpr void *__builtin_assume_aligned(const void *, size_t, ...);
+ void *__builtin_assume_aligned(const void *, size_t, ...) noexcept;
+constexpr void *__builtin_assume_aligned(const void *, size_t, ...) noexcept;
+ void *__builtin_assume_aligned(const void *, size_t, ...) throw();
+constexpr void *__builtin_assume_aligned(const void *, size_t, ...) throw();
+
----------------
erichkeane wrote:
>From reading through that (and trying to search my memory): A number of our
>`LIBBUILTIN` builtins are just replacements for things that would otherwise be
>implemented in the library.
So we need to allow them to be redeclared because they might be implemented in
the library.
However, I would be unopposed to a patch that makes declaring a `__builtin`
spelled as reserved identifier ill-formed.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/91894
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
